A 28-year-old German student is standing trial in Dresden accused of founding a criminal organization and committing six serious attacks on neo-Nazis, in an unusual case of violent left-wing extremism in Germany.

State prosecutors say Lina E.* and her three co-defendants — Lennart A., Philipp M., and Jannis R. — carried out a series of attacks on neo-Nazis in the eastern states of Thuringia and Saxony between 2018 and 2020, including two attacks on Leon R., a notorious far-right extremist who was himself arrested for allegedly forming a far-right extremist organization.

The group around Lina E. is believed to have raided a well-known neo-Nazi bar in the town of Eisenach in late 2019 and attacked Leon R. with hammers and batons. When the initial attack failed, the group attacked him again a few weeks later outside his car. Other neo-Nazis were left with broken bones and other injuries after the attacks.

Prosecutors are asking for an  eight year prison term for Lina E., who has already spent well over two years behind bars as the long and complicated trial continued, and up to 3 years and 9 months in prison for the co-defendants. The defense called for Lina E. to be convicted only of the lesser charges of attempted bodily injury and theft.

The case has created plenty of political tension, with the defense and far-left scenes in Lina E.'s home city of Leipzig saying that she has been scapegoated as a left-wing terrorist by both the media and the authorities. Many allege that the justice system is too lenient on neo-Nazi perpetrators.

The state prosecutors say Lina E. is still extremely dangerous. Leading prosecutor Alexandra Geilhorn said the defendant had shown no remorse and had not distanced herself from her left-wing ideology. The prosecutor also described what she called the "severe violence" of the attacks, carried out with an "extraordinary extent of criminal energy," coupled with a "notable measure of callousness." 

If any German comrade knows how to support her defense, you should drop a link.

"well you can still travel between states, it's not like we live in a military dictatorship"

"it's just up to the states, I think a lot of people are getting too excited"

"if you want an abortion you can still get one in America, none of the laws are changing here" [not even true here, we have pre-roe abortion ban that got struck down by roe]

"well the justices can still change their votes, it's just a draft. Altio wrote so much crazy stuff that one of them must disagree."

"I'm surprised the federal government would give away so much of their power to the states with this"

"People in Mississippi can still drive to Illinois for an abortion." "or Florida I think" (lol)

"My roommate was crying" 'oh yeah my roommate was too, I told her to calm down and everything will be fine"

Lib :cope: engine in full force

haven't even reach the resource wars part of climate change yet or the mega migrations :joker-shopping:

:xi-clap: China haters aren't going to be able to cope

Archive: https://archive.is/2021.09.20-203459/https://www.wsj.com/articles/xi-jinping-aims-to-rein-in-chinese-capitalism-hew-to-maos-socialist-vision-11632150725?mod=flipboard

During the late 1950s and 1960s, it is estimated that the Soviet Union had some of the highest abortion rates in the world. The abortion rate during this period is not known for sure, because the Soviet Union did not start releasing abortion statistics until perestroika. The best estimates, which are based on surveys of medical professionals during this time, say that about 6 to 7 million abortions were performed per year.

One of the few insights we have regarding abortion during the late 1950s is a survey, conducted between 1958 and 1959, of 26,000 women seeking abortions, 20,000 from urban areas and 6,000 from rural areas. Several facts can be gathered from this survey regarding what kind of women sought abortions and their reasons for doing so. First of all, an "overwhelming majority" of the women were married, though the survey results do not give an exact percentage. Second, we can learn how many children the women had. Of the urban women, 10.2% were childless, 41.2% had one child, 32.1% had two children, and 16.5% had three or more children, making the median number of children 1.47. Of the rural women, 6.2% were childless, 26.9% had one child, 30% had two children, and 36.9% had three or more children, the median number of children being 2.06. Of women seeking abortions, urban women were more likely to have fewer or no children. This may have been an effect of the lack of space faced by urban women.

The survey also examined women's reasons for seeking abortions. It divided the reasons into four categories. The first was "unconditionally removable", things that could be remedied by government action, such as material need, lack of space, no one at home, or no institution to put the child in. The second category was "conditionally removable", things that might possibly be remedied by government action, such as the absence of a husband, family troubles, or illness of one or both parents. The third category was "unremovable", things that were not caused by social conditions, such as a baby in the family or many children already. The fourth category was "unclear causes", such as one or both parents unwilling to have a child and multiple other reasons.

The results for this question were: of the reasons given by urban women, 35% were unconditionally removable, 16.5%, were conditionally removable, 10% were unremovable, and 37.9% were unclear. Of the reasons given by rural women, 26.3% were unconditionally removable, 18% were conditionally removable, 10% were unremovable, and 45.2% were unclear. The most marked different was that more urban women cited lack of space as a reason. The survey results found that abortion rates were much higher among women who work, unsurprisingly, with a rate of 105.5 abortions per thousand pregnancies, as against 41.5 per thousand in women who did not work.

If the abortion rates of this survey are taken to be representative, then during this period the number of annual abortions was higher than the number of live births. This would also mean that the abortion rates in the Soviet Union were the highest of any in the world at that time. By the end of the Brezhnev era in 1982, Soviet birthrates hovered just at or below replacement level except in the Muslim-majority Central Asian republics.

“We are going to allow women to work and study. We have got frameworks, of course. Women are going to be very active in the society but within the framework of Islam,” Zabihullah Mujahid, the group’s spokesman, said at a press conference in Kabul on Tuesday.

Mujahid, who had been a shadowy figure for years, said that “there will be no discrimination against women” adding that “they are going to work shoulder to shoulder with us.”

Pressed on how the new Taliban government will differ from the previous one, Mujahid said that the group has evolved and will not take the same actions they did in the past.

“There will be a difference when it comes to the actions we are going to take” compared with 20 years ago, he said.

“We are committed to the media within our cultural frameworks. Private media can continue to be free and independent. They can continue their activities,” he said.

He also said the group has no plans to enter the homes of people or carry out retaliatory attacks on anyone who served in the previous governments, worked with foreigners or were part of the Afghan National Security Forces.

There have been unconfirmed reports of Taliban fighters entering the homes of Kabul residents, but Mujahid said those were impostors who should be turned over to the Taliban and face appropriate punishment

Stable Modlist ✅

Lots of weed ✅

No gods ✅

No masters ✅

Also in the original German it wasn't socialists second it was the sozialdemokraten (social democrats)

Fourth Reich :amerikkka: :germany-cool:

With Putin talking about the orthodox church being holy and using to justify some conservative bullshit, all I can remember was the bolsheviks going around the country proudly declaring that cities were now "officially godless" and redistributing the church's gold amongst the people and using it to pay for electrification projects.

"ChapoChat is dying"

"userbase has been torn to pieces by division"

"website is an absolute failure"

"the community is already dead"

"I literally saw Mother Hexbear get slaughtered by the CIA and served at an Outback Steakhouse during MysteryMeatMondays™" (vegan gang btw)

These are some paraphrased examples but I see this sort of defeatist, all-is-lost attitude all over the place and on c/main right now. It is annoying and actively contributes to the problem you are complaining about.

I know you all are liberals because this is the same kind of cringe posting that we'd see on our all favorite reddit defaults everytime those admins decided to make a change that removed 'borderline content' like child pornography and genocide. You'd have a million heroic posters coming out of the woodwork to declare "reddit just killed Aaron Swartz's vision", "I left digg for this", "admins are officially chinese" in order to 'save' reddit.

Have y'all been on an internet forum before? Bans always cause this sort of discontent in their wake, this community is not dying because some wreckers got banned and some good posters left. There are ten thousand posters here, give or take for the bots and alts. All of us are united in a sacred mission to destroy capitalism and dunk on the libs. Moderation and struggle sessions are part of both of those goals.

We trust the mods and admins to enforce the site policy and in return users are trusted to set site policy but also to adhere to it. The site currently has problems with wreckers and transphobic content, so the site policy was corrected and crackdowns began on those things. That is how things are supposed to work. Where is the issue? Besides YOU (the user, hi!) this process only has three elements.

1. Acknowledging there is a problem with transphobic content and wreckers
2. Trusting the Mods and Admins
3. The site policy

Now topic no.1 has seen plenty of posts and I'm not here to rehash. Chances are if you're reading this you've read them too. There was a problem that needed to and still is being addressed.

Topics no.2 no.3 have been more recent popular topics, which is good because it reflects a desire for the userbase to improve the structure of the site. We have /c/userunion for those discussions to take place. Some people do have some legitimate questions and concerns about these two topics, and there should be discussion (in userunion) about them. That's participatory policy making, as socialists we literally demand it, express issues and suggest changes there. Improvements to site policy and moderation are good!

What is NOT good is seeing post lamenting the fall of ChapoChat, posting like doomers because the community has too much "drama" or "lost too many people." Just chill. The defeatism and complaining without suggestions basically wrecker behavior. You are a leftist in the 21st century, you should be used to setbacks and corrections of policy by now, you should know that we will face lost after lost until we suddenly win the world. All the dumbass stupidpol wreckers and every local internet Klavern who attempts to start shit on here are jacking off to your doomer posts right now. They have screenshotted you and are currently laughing at you and calling you a liberal. This is the worst fate for a poster: all that saves us all is our theory and praxis.

For this site: our theory is the Code of Conduct and the rules created in /c/userunion. Our praxis is seeking the issues in our theory, correcting them, and moving forward even more vigorously, with more knowledge and righteousness. Let us advance unified in purpose and constantly strive to forge the best leftist social platform possible.

Have a Marx quote in conclusion:

"If we have chosen the position in life in which we can most of all work for mankind, no burdens can bow us down, because they are sacrifices for the benefit of all; then we shall experience no petty, limited, selfish joy, but our happiness will belong to millions, our deeds will live on quietly but perpetually at work, and over our ashes will be shed the hot tears of noble people." Marx, Reflections of a Young Man (1835)